Anonymous wrote:I have a cousin in his twenties who has had two kidney transplant surgeries - the first failed. He’s doing ok now, but will be taking medication for life, and everyone around him will have their fingers crossed, for life, that he will continue to be ok.

I live in Brooklyn, in liberal, well-off neighborhood, and am surrounded by writers, some of whom I’d bet money would slot in very neatly with the Chunks. I can’t stop reading opinions about this story. It may be too awkward to broach, but I do hope the National Kidney Foundation puts out a very tough, sharp statement. Bless Dorland for what she did.

Anonymous wrote:I have a cousin in his twenties who has had two kidney transplant surgeries - the first failed. He’s doing ok now, but will be taking medication for life, and everyone around him will have their fingers crossed, for life, that he will continue to be ok.

I live in Brooklyn, in liberal, well-off neighborhood, and am surrounded by writers, some of whom I’d bet money would slot in very neatly with the Chunks. I can’t stop reading opinions about this story. It may be too awkward to broach, but I do hope the National Kidney Foundation puts out a very tough, sharp statement. Bless Dorland for what she did.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to spam! Don't know how to embed tweets

https://mobile.twitter.com/philosipede/status/1448224322242236418

Wrong link smh

https://mobile.twitter.com/PMatzko/status/1448075901028143110

I appreciate your effort to get it right because that thread really spoke to me. He nails it. A quick summary because I think these points are so key:

1) Dawn is annoying to Sonya and others because she doesn't understand the social code of UMC writing circles. She doesn't know how to "humble brag" about her kidney donation in that way where you make sure everyone knows what you did but in a way that makes it seem like you don't want anyone to know (even though you obviously do). She is earnest and honest instead of calculating about the way she presents herself, and that comes off as grating. She can't code switch because the code is foreign to her and they don't teach this stuff at public schools in rural Iowa. You have to learn it from parents and peers. But the time Dawn is in this environment, her personality is what it is and it's too late for her to learn how to fit in with the cool kids.

and

2) When you are poor, your "good name" is sometimes the only currency you have. Which helps explain why Dawn's response to being humiliated in this way seems so overzealous. To Dawn, having the one thing she's ever done that she felt was uncomplicatedly good (the purest evidence of her worth as a person) ridiculed by people she admired was like having all her money stolen from the accounts, or being physically maimed. It tore right at her fundamental sense of self. You can argue she overreacted but if you don't understand the importance of reputation and social standing to someone from a poor background, that's a value judgement that ignores Dawn's values.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to spam! Don't know how to embed tweets

https://mobile.twitter.com/philosipede/status/1448224322242236418

Wrong link smh

https://mobile.twitter.com/PMatzko/status/1448075901028143110

I appreciate your effort to get it right because that thread really spoke to me. He nails it. A quick summary because I think these points are so key:

1) Dawn is annoying to Sonya and others because she doesn't understand the social code of UMC writing circles. She doesn't know how to "humble brag" about her kidney donation in that way where you make sure everyone knows what you did but in a way that makes it seem like you don't want anyone to know (even though you obviously do). She is earnest and honest instead of calculating about the way she presents herself, and that comes off as grating. She can't code switch because the code is foreign to her and they don't teach this stuff at public schools in rural Iowa. You have to learn it from parents and peers. But the time Dawn is in this environment, her personality is what it is and it's too late for her to learn how to fit in with the cool kids.

and

2) When you are poor, your "good name" is sometimes the only currency you have. Which helps explain why Dawn's response to being humiliated in this way seems so overzealous. To Dawn, having the one thing she's ever done that she felt was uncomplicatedly good (the purest evidence of her worth as a person) ridiculed by people she admired was like having all her money stolen from the accounts, or being physically maimed. It tore right at her fundamental sense of self. You can argue she overreacted but if you don't understand the importance of reputation and social standing to someone from a poor background, that's a value judgement that ignores Dawn's values.

This is incredibly insightful. The question of class permeates all of this, but the Chunky Monkeys cannot recognize it because it seems many base not only their sense of self but all of their work on questions focused around identity politics.

Datalounge has a couple of really interesting threads about this, and people there have pointed out that post-professional groups created after attaining MFAs, like most in the CMs, put extraordinary effort into networking because of the limited opportunities in big-deal publishing. That has to reach backwards and infect the work, and also assured that genuine talents who don’t fit into that because they don’t have the degree or the particular social affect will not only get nothing from such groups, but will be damaged by participating.

Anonymous wrote:We need to reach out to GrubStreet en masse and tell them this is not OK that they still have Sonya Larson, Allison Murphy, and Christopher Castellani still on their staff.

They need to be suspended until a thorough investigation is done.

https://grubstreet.org/contact-us/

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I can't help but think what fact(s) would have to be different for Ng to call out the actual plagiarism?

I'm horrified, but also deeply curious at the human behavior at play here.

She would have to go back in time and not be the person who was egging Larson on.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sorry to spam! Don't know how to embed tweets

https://mobile.twitter.com/philosipede/status/1448224322242236418

Wrong link smh

https://mobile.twitter.com/PMatzko/status/1448075901028143110

I appreciate your effort to get it right because that thread really spoke to me. He nails it. A quick summary because I think these points are so key:

1) Dawn is annoying to Sonya and others because she doesn't understand the social code of UMC writing circles. She doesn't know how to "humble brag" about her kidney donation in that way where you make sure everyone knows what you did but in a way that makes it seem like you don't want anyone to know (even though you obviously do). She is earnest and honest instead of calculating about the way she presents herself, and that comes off as grating. She can't code switch because the code is foreign to her and they don't teach this stuff at public schools in rural Iowa. You have to learn it from parents and peers. But the time Dawn is in this environment, her personality is what it is and it's too late for her to learn how to fit in with the cool kids.

and

2) When you are poor, your "good name" is sometimes the only currency you have. Which helps explain why Dawn's response to being humiliated in this way seems so overzealous. To Dawn, having the one thing she's ever done that she felt was uncomplicatedly good (the purest evidence of her worth as a person) ridiculed by people she admired was like having all her money stolen from the accounts, or being physically maimed. It tore right at her fundamental sense of self. You can argue she overreacted but if you don't understand the importance of reputation and social standing to someone from a poor background, that's a value judgement that ignores Dawn's values.

Anonymous wrote:I can't help but think what fact(s) would have to be different for Ng to call out the actual plagiarism?

I'm horrified, but also deeply curious at the human behavior at play here.

Anonymous wrote:I think Sonya Larson is not only a bad art friend, but a bad artist. I write in the literary genre, and I've been in the position of helping to select works for honors equivalent to BASS. Larson's story demonstrates she is not curious enough to be a good artist; she assigns a facile motive to her kidney donor. Larson's story demonstrates she is not precise enough to be a good artist; every detail of the donation was transparently unresearched. Larson's story demonstrates she does not have the empathy to be a good artist; the characters of the two women are only superficially explored. Larson's story demonstrates she does not have the creativity to be a good artist; the story is structured in a derivative manner, and there is not one iota of profundity, beauty, or mystery in the prose.

Why does she write? I've never understood "literary" writers who have so little feeling for language.